Features
Sri Lanka’s proposed TRC
By C. A. Chandraprema
Whenever we hear the term Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC), what comes to mind is the body by that name established in South Africa in 1995, headed by Archbishop Desmond Tutu. The South African TRC may not have been the first of its kind, but it was undoubtedly the one that gained the most public attention and the most accolades. Rightly so, because the South African TRC was a sincere effort at truth telling, healing and reconciliation and not an attempt to continue a war by other means.
South African TRC
The South African Truth and Reconciliation Commission was set up under the provisions of South Africa’s Promotion of National Unity and Reconciliation Act No. 34 of 1995. The purpose of this body was firstly the investigation and the establishment of as complete a picture as possible of the nature, causes and extent of gross violations of human rights committed during the period from 1 March 1960 to the end of the apartheid era. Secondly, the granting of amnesty to persons who make full disclosure of all the relevant facts relating to acts associated with a political objective committed in the course of the conflicts of the said period. And thirdly, affording victims an opportunity to relate the violations they suffered; the adoption of measures aimed at the granting of reparation to, and the rehabilitation and the restoration of the human and civil dignity of, victims of violations of human rights.
The South African TRC functioned through three Committees – the Committee on Human Rights Violations, the Committee on Amnesty and the Committee on Reparation and Rehabilitation. The provision for amnesty was the centrepiece of the TRC process. The Act of Parliament that set up this body stated that “there is a need for understanding but not for vengeance, a need for reparation but not for retaliation, a need for Ubuntu (humanity towards others) but not for victimization”. It was the task of the Committee on Amnesty to consider applications for amnesty. The Act in question had to be associated with a political objective committed in the course of the conflicts of the past and the applicant had to make a full disclosure of all relevant facts. The amnesty was available to both anti-government guerillas as well as members of the security forces for acts committed bona fide with the object of countering or resisting the armed liberation struggle.
The South African TRC did have an investigating unit headed by a Commissioner to support the Commission and the Committees of the Commission in carrying out inquiries and investigations. The Committee on Human Rights, for instance, did carry out investigations into human rights violations from 1960 to the end of the apartheid era. When the Human Rights Committee finds that a gross violation of human rights has been committed and that a person is a victim of such violation, it was required by law to refer the matter not to the Attorney General or the Courts but to the Committee on Reparation and Rehabilitation.
If any person is questioned by the Commission, any incriminating evidence directly or indirectly derived from such a questioning was not admissible as evidence against the person concerned in criminal proceedings in a court of law. Hence the South African TRC was not an inquisitorial or punitive body but an institution genuinely designed to promote truth telling, healing and reconciliation between rival sides in a long drawn out conflict.
Sri Lanka’s proposed TURC
A Bill to establish a Truth, Unity and Reconciliation Commission (TURC) in Sri Lanka has now been gazetted. Despite the name, what has been proposed for Sri Lanka is completely different from the South African TRC. While the provision for amnesty for persons on both sides of the conflict was the centrepiece of the South African TRC, the proposed Sri Lankan TURC has no provision for amnesty at all. What the proposed Bill seeks to establish is an inquisitorial commission which will conduct investigations, and make recommendations. The findings of the Commission’s investigations can also be referred to the Attorney General for criminal prosecution.
Under Clauses 7(1) and 12(1) the purpose of the Commission will be to receive and collect information and material and investigate, inquire, and make recommendations in respect of complaints or allegations or reports relating to alleged violation of human rights anywhere in Sri Lanka, which were caused in the course of, or reasonably connected to, or consequent to the conflict which took place in the Northern and Eastern Provinces during the period 1983 to 2009, or its aftermath.
Under Clause 12 (2) the scope of the investigations to be carried out by the proposed body extends from killings, torture, sexual violence, abduction, unlawful arrests or detentions all the way to corruption and intentional misuse of equipment and financial resources in relation to the conflict which took place in the Northern and Eastern provinces. The proposed law also requires that the TURC inquire into whether any of the alleged violations and abuses were committed as part of ‘systemic crimes’. The TURC is also required to make findings in regard to those responsible for the commission of the alleged violations and abuses, including those who advised, planned, directed, commanded or ordered such atrocities;
Trial at Bar style investigative panels
Under Clause 7(2), investigations and inquiries will be conducted by panels consisting of not fewer than three members of the Commission. The Chairperson of the Commission will appoint the investigative panels the way the Chief Justice appoints judges to a Trial at Bar.
Sweeping powers to investigate
Under Clauses 13(s), 13(t), 13(z), 13(za), 14 and 45 the proposed Commission is to be accorded sweeping powers to conduct its investigations including the requisition of reports, records, documents or information from governmental authorities or any other source and to compel the production of such material. The Commission can summon any person residing in Sri Lanka to attend any hearing to provide information or produce any document or other thing in such person’s possession. The Commission can make an application to a Magistrate for the issuance of a search warrant to enable the Police to search any premises suspected to contain material relevant to an investigation being conducted by the Commission.
All persons including members of the Government and public officials are mandatorily required to co-operate with the Commission. If any person fails to appear before the Commission, refuses to answer any question or fails to produce any document or other thing, which is in his possession or control such person shall be guilty of contempt against the authority of the Commission which shall be punishable by the Court of Appeal as though it were an offence of contempt committed against the Court of Appeal.
Overriding powers of the Commission
Under Clauses 15(1) and (2) the Commission shall submit its final report to the President at the expiration of its term along with its recommendations. It is also required to submit interim reports to the President bi-annually with recommendations and such reports will be tabled in Parliament within three weeks of their receipt. Under Clause 39, within one month from the date of publication of the first interim report of the Commission the President shall establish a Monitoring Committee to implement the recommendations of the Commission.
According to Clause 12(f) the Commission is required to make recommendations with regard to institutional, administrative and legislative policy and resource allocation measures that should be taken to prevent, and ensure non-recurrence of damage to persons or property or violation of human rights and to promote reconciliation. Such recommendations could have wide ranging implications for the country and the people. Yet, these recommendations are to be implemented forthwith by a Monitoring Committee without being referred to Cabinet or debated in Parliament first.
Under Clause 40 the Monitoring Committee has to submit bi-annual reports to the President on the implementation of the recommendations of the Commission. Where the implementation of any recommendation has not been fully complied with, the reports of the Committee shall include the reasons for non-implementation. Such reports by the Monitoring Committee will be tabled in Parliament within two weeks of receipt. Thus, Parliament is kept informed of the actions of the Commission only after the fact, with the Cabinet and Parliament having no role in deciding whether the implementation of a particular recommendation of the Commission should be carried through or not.
Foreign funding and control
Under Clause 13(g) the Commission may enter into agreements with any person or entity necessary to achieve the objectives of the Commission. Under Clause 13(k) the Commission is empowered to seek technical assistance from any person or institution or organisation in the interest of advancement of the commission’s work. Under Clauses 13(h) and 35(1)(c) the Commission is empowered to raise funds by obtaining grants, gifts or endowments. All funds received from outside Sri Lanka have to be channelled through the External Resources Department. Though Clause 11 of the Bill states that the Commission shall be considered an autonomous institution and shall not be subject to the control or direction of any person or authority, we know through experience that the foreign parties that will fund this operation will control it.
Actively seeking questionable evidence
Clause 13(x) empowers the proposed Commission to receive information in confidence from any person, where in the opinion of the Commission, the disclosure of such information would pose a risk to life or security of any person. The Commission will thus end up making recommendations based on information that nobody else knows anything about and the veracity of which cannot be checked. The Commission cannot be compelled to disclose the identity of any person supplying information in confidence.
Clause 13(y) empowers the Commission to admit, notwithstanding any provision of the Evidence Ordinance, any information, whether written or oral, which might be inadmissible in civil or criminal proceedings in order to facilitate truth seeking. Thus, the Commission bases its recommendations on dodgy evidence that the normal justice system would not touch.
Clause 13(z) empowers the Commission to seek assistance from community leaders and organisations to facilitate its public sessions. In practice, this becomes an open invitation to ‘syndicates’ of informers, narrators and witnesses as has often transpired at trials before the International Criminal Court.
Referral to the AG for prosecution
Clause 48 says that no evidence of any statement made or given by any person to or before the Commission shall be admissible against that person in proceedings in any civil or criminal court. Clause 16(1) states that the Commission’s recommendations shall not be deemed to be a determination of civil or criminal liability of any person.
However, Clause 13(zd) empowers the Commission to refer matters to the relevant law enforcement or prosecuting authorities of Sri Lanka for further investigation and necessary action, where it appears to the Commission that an offence or offences punishable under the Penal Code or any other law of Sri Lanka has been committed. Clause 16(2) states that notwithstanding anything to the contrary in the Code of Criminal Procedure Act, No. 15 of 1979 or any other law, it shall be lawful for the Attorney-General to institute criminal proceedings in a designated court of law in respect of any offence based on material collected in the course of an investigation or inquiry by the Commission established under this Act.
Thus, what is being proposed for Sri Lanka is not a truth and reconciliation commission at all but a body which will, with the backing of foreign and local sponsors, wage law-fare against those who won the war against terror and seek to make wide ranging changes in Sri Lanka without any need to have those proposed changes vetted and approved by Cabinet and Parliament first.
by Dr Gotabhya Ranasinghe
Senior Consultant Cardiologist
National Hospital Sri Lanka
When we sought a meeting with Hon Dr. Ramesh Pathirana, Minister of Health, he graciously cleared his busy schedule to accommodate us. Renowned for his attentive listening and deep understanding, Minister Pathirana is dedicated to advancing the health sector. His openness and transparency exemplify the qualities of an exemplary politician and minister.
Dr. Palitha Mahipala, the current Health Secretary, demonstrates both commendable enthusiasm and unwavering support. This combination of attributes makes him a highly compatible colleague for the esteemed Minister of Health.
Our discussion centered on a project that has been in the works for the past 30 years, one that no other minister had managed to advance.
Minister Pathirana, however, recognized the project’s significance and its potential to revolutionize care for heart patients.
The project involves the construction of a state-of-the-art facility at the premises of the National Hospital Colombo. The project’s location within the premises of the National Hospital underscores its importance and relevance to the healthcare infrastructure of the nation.
This facility will include a cardiology building and a tertiary care center, equipped with the latest technology to handle and treat all types of heart-related conditions and surgeries.
Securing funding was a major milestone for this initiative. Minister Pathirana successfully obtained approval for a $40 billion loan from the Asian Development Bank. With the funding in place, the foundation stone is scheduled to be laid in September this year, and construction will begin in January 2025.
This project guarantees a consistent and uninterrupted supply of stents and related medications for heart patients. As a result, patients will have timely access to essential medical supplies during their treatment and recovery. By securing these critical resources, the project aims to enhance patient outcomes, minimize treatment delays, and maintain the highest standards of cardiac care.
Upon its fruition, this monumental building will serve as a beacon of hope and healing, symbolizing the unwavering dedication to improving patient outcomes and fostering a healthier society.We anticipate a future marked by significant progress and positive outcomes in Sri Lanka’s cardiovascular treatment landscape within the foreseeable timeframe.
by Fr. Emmanuel Fernando, OMI
Jesuit Fr. Aloysius Pieris (affectionately called Fr. Aloy) celebrated his 90th birthday on April 9, 2024 and I, as the editor of our Oblate Journal, THE MISSIONARY OBLATE had gone to press by that time. Immediately I decided to publish an article, appreciating the untiring selfless services he continues to offer for inter-Faith dialogue, the renewal of the Catholic Church, his concern for the poor and the suffering Sri Lankan masses and to me, the present writer.
It was in 1988, when I was appointed Director of the Oblate Scholastics at Ampitiya by the then Oblate Provincial Fr. Anselm Silva, that I came to know Fr. Aloy more closely. Knowing well his expertise in matters spiritual, theological, Indological and pastoral, and with the collaborative spirit of my companion-formators, our Oblate Scholastics were sent to Tulana, the Research and Encounter Centre, Kelaniya, of which he is the Founder-Director, for ‘exposure-programmes’ on matters spiritual, biblical, theological and pastoral. Some of these dimensions according to my view and that of my companion-formators, were not available at the National Seminary, Ampitiya.
Ever since that time, our Oblate formators/ accompaniers at the Oblate Scholasticate, Ampitiya , have continued to send our Oblate Scholastics to Tulana Centre for deepening their insights and convictions regarding matters needed to serve the people in today’s context. Fr. Aloy also had tried very enthusiastically with the Oblate team headed by Frs. Oswald Firth and Clement Waidyasekara to begin a Theologate, directed by the Religious Congregations in Sri Lanka, for the contextual formation/ accompaniment of their members. It should very well be a desired goal of the Leaders / Provincials of the Religious Congregations.
Besides being a formator/accompanier at the Oblate Scholasticate, I was entrusted also with the task of editing and publishing our Oblate journal, ‘The Missionary Oblate’. To maintain the quality of the journal I continue to depend on Fr. Aloy for his thought-provoking and stimulating articles on Biblical Spirituality, Biblical Theology and Ecclesiology. I am very grateful to him for his generous assistance. Of late, his writings on renewal of the Church, initiated by Pope St. John XX111 and continued by Pope Francis through the Synodal path, published in our Oblate journal, enable our readers to focus their attention also on the needed renewal in the Catholic Church in Sri Lanka. Fr. Aloy appreciated very much the Synodal path adopted by the Jesuit Pope Francis for the renewal of the Church, rooted very much on prayerful discernment. In my Religious and presbyteral life, Fr.Aloy continues to be my spiritual animator / guide and ongoing formator / acccompanier.
Fr. Aloysius Pieris, BA Hons (Lond), LPh (SHC, India), STL (PFT, Naples), PhD (SLU/VC), ThD (Tilburg), D.Ltt (KU), has been one of the eminent Asian theologians well recognized internationally and one who has lectured and held visiting chairs in many universities both in the West and in the East. Many members of Religious Congregations from Asian countries have benefited from his lectures and guidance in the East Asian Pastoral Institute (EAPI) in Manila, Philippines. He had been a Theologian consulted by the Federation of Asian Bishops’ Conferences for many years. During his professorship at the Gregorian University in Rome, he was called to be a member of a special group of advisers on other religions consulted by Pope Paul VI.
Fr. Aloy is the author of more than 30 books and well over 500 Research Papers. Some of his books and articles have been translated and published in several countries. Among those books, one can find the following: 1) The Genesis of an Asian Theology of Liberation (An Autobiographical Excursus on the Art of Theologising in Asia, 2) An Asian Theology of Liberation, 3) Providential Timeliness of Vatican 11 (a long-overdue halt to a scandalous millennium, 4) Give Vatican 11 a chance, 5) Leadership in the Church, 6) Relishing our faith in working for justice (Themes for study and discussion), 7) A Message meant mainly, not exclusively for Jesuits (Background information necessary for helping Francis renew the Church), 8) Lent in Lanka (Reflections and Resolutions, 9) Love meets wisdom (A Christian Experience of Buddhism, 10) Fire and Water 11) God’s Reign for God’s poor, 12) Our Unhiddden Agenda (How we Jesuits work, pray and form our men). He is also the Editor of two journals, Vagdevi, Journal of Religious Reflection and Dialogue, New Series.
Fr. Aloy has a BA in Pali and Sanskrit from the University of London and a Ph.D in Buddhist Philosophy from the University of Sri Lankan, Vidyodaya Campus. On Nov. 23, 2019, he was awarded the prestigious honorary Doctorate of Literature (D.Litt) by the Chancellor of the University of Kelaniya, the Most Venerable Welamitiyawe Dharmakirthi Sri Kusala Dhamma Thera.
Fr. Aloy continues to be a promoter of Gospel values and virtues. Justice as a constitutive dimension of love and social concern for the downtrodden masses are very much noted in his life and work. He had very much appreciated the commitment of the late Fr. Joseph (Joe) Fernando, the National Director of the Social and Economic Centre (SEDEC) for the poor.
In Sri Lanka, a few religious Congregations – the Good Shepherd Sisters, the Christian Brothers, the Marist Brothers and the Oblates – have invited him to animate their members especially during their Provincial Congresses, Chapters and International Conferences. The mainline Christian Churches also have sought his advice and followed his seminars. I, for one, regret very much, that the Sri Lankan authorities of the Catholic Church –today’s Hierarchy—- have not sought Fr.
Aloy’s expertise for the renewal of the Catholic Church in Sri Lanka and thus have not benefited from the immense store of wisdom and insight that he can offer to our local Church while the Sri Lankan bishops who governed the Catholic church in the immediate aftermath of the Second Vatican Council (Edmund Fernando OMI, Anthony de Saram, Leo Nanayakkara OSB, Frank Marcus Fernando, Paul Perera,) visited him and consulted him on many matters. Among the Tamil Bishops, Bishop Rayappu Joseph was keeping close contact with him and Bishop J. Deogupillai hosted him and his team visiting him after the horrible Black July massacre of Tamils.
Sri Lanka-Singapore Free Trade Agreement
By Gomi Senadhira
senadhiragomi@gmail.com
“You might tell fairy tales, but the progress of a country cannot be achieved through such narratives. A country cannot be developed by making false promises. The country moved backward because of the electoral promises made by political parties throughout time. We have witnessed that the ultimate result of this is the country becoming bankrupt. Unfortunately, many segments of the population have not come to realize this yet.” – President Ranil Wickremesinghe, 2024 Budget speech
Any Sri Lankan would agree with the above words of President Wickremesinghe on the false promises our politicians and officials make and the fairy tales they narrate which bankrupted this country. So, to understand this, let’s look at one such fairy tale with lots of false promises; Ranil Wickremesinghe’s greatest achievement in the area of international trade and investment promotion during the Yahapalana period, Sri Lanka-Singapore Free Trade Agreement (SLSFTA).
It is appropriate and timely to do it now as Finance Minister Wickremesinghe has just presented to parliament a bill on the National Policy on Economic Transformation which includes the establishment of an Office for International Trade and the Sri Lanka Institute of Economics and International Trade.
Was SLSFTA a “Cleverly negotiated Free Trade Agreement” as stated by the (former) Minister of Development Strategies and International Trade Malik Samarawickrama during the Parliamentary Debate on the SLSFTA in July 2018, or a colossal blunder covered up with lies, false promises, and fairy tales? After SLSFTA was signed there were a number of fairy tales published on this agreement by the Ministry of Development Strategies and International, Institute of Policy Studies, and others.
However, for this article, I would like to limit my comments to the speech by Minister Samarawickrama during the Parliamentary Debate, and the two most important areas in the agreement which were covered up with lies, fairy tales, and false promises, namely: revenue loss for Sri Lanka and Investment from Singapore. On the other important area, “Waste products dumping” I do not want to comment here as I have written extensively on the issue.
1. The revenue loss
During the Parliamentary Debate in July 2018, Minister Samarawickrama stated “…. let me reiterate that this FTA with Singapore has been very cleverly negotiated by us…. The liberalisation programme under this FTA has been carefully designed to have the least impact on domestic industry and revenue collection. We have included all revenue sensitive items in the negative list of items which will not be subject to removal of tariff. Therefore, 97.8% revenue from Customs duty is protected. Our tariff liberalisation will take place over a period of 12-15 years! In fact, the revenue earned through tariffs on goods imported from Singapore last year was Rs. 35 billion.
The revenue loss for over the next 15 years due to the FTA is only Rs. 733 million– which when annualised, on average, is just Rs. 51 million. That is just 0.14% per year! So anyone who claims the Singapore FTA causes revenue loss to the Government cannot do basic arithmetic! Mr. Speaker, in conclusion, I call on my fellow members of this House – don’t mislead the public with baseless criticism that is not grounded in facts. Don’t look at petty politics and use these issues for your own political survival.”
I was surprised to read the minister’s speech because an article published in January 2018 in “The Straits Times“, based on information released by the Singaporean Negotiators stated, “…. With the FTA, tariff savings for Singapore exports are estimated to hit $10 million annually“.
As the annual tariff savings (that is the revenue loss for Sri Lanka) calculated by the Singaporean Negotiators, Singaporean $ 10 million (Sri Lankan rupees 1,200 million in 2018) was way above the rupees’ 733 million revenue loss for 15 years estimated by the Sri Lankan negotiators, it was clear to any observer that one of the parties to the agreement had not done the basic arithmetic!
Six years later, according to a report published by “The Morning” newspaper, speaking at the Committee on Public Finance (COPF) on 7th May 2024, Mr Samarawickrama’s chief trade negotiator K.J. Weerasinghehad had admitted “…. that forecasted revenue loss for the Government of Sri Lanka through the Singapore FTA is Rs. 450 million in 2023 and Rs. 1.3 billion in 2024.”
If these numbers are correct, as tariff liberalisation under the SLSFTA has just started, we will pass Rs 2 billion very soon. Then, the question is how Sri Lanka’s trade negotiators made such a colossal blunder. Didn’t they do their basic arithmetic? If they didn’t know how to do basic arithmetic they should have at least done their basic readings. For example, the headline of the article published in The Straits Times in January 2018 was “Singapore, Sri Lanka sign FTA, annual savings of $10m expected”.
Anyway, as Sri Lanka’s chief negotiator reiterated at the COPF meeting that “…. since 99% of the tariffs in Singapore have zero rates of duty, Sri Lanka has agreed on 80% tariff liberalisation over a period of 15 years while expecting Singapore investments to address the imbalance in trade,” let’s turn towards investment.
Investment from Singapore
In July 2018, speaking during the Parliamentary Debate on the FTA this is what Minister Malik Samarawickrama stated on investment from Singapore, “Already, thanks to this FTA, in just the past two-and-a-half months since the agreement came into effect we have received a proposal from Singapore for investment amounting to $ 14.8 billion in an oil refinery for export of petroleum products. In addition, we have proposals for a steel manufacturing plant for exports ($ 1 billion investment), flour milling plant ($ 50 million), sugar refinery ($ 200 million). This adds up to more than $ 16.05 billion in the pipeline on these projects alone.
And all of these projects will create thousands of more jobs for our people. In principle approval has already been granted by the BOI and the investors are awaiting the release of land the environmental approvals to commence the project.
I request the Opposition and those with vested interests to change their narrow-minded thinking and join us to develop our country. We must always look at what is best for the whole community, not just the few who may oppose. We owe it to our people to courageously take decisions that will change their lives for the better.”
According to the media report I quoted earlier, speaking at the Committee on Public Finance (COPF) Chief Negotiator Weerasinghe has admitted that Sri Lanka was not happy with overall Singapore investments that have come in the past few years in return for the trade liberalisation under the Singapore-Sri Lanka Free Trade Agreement. He has added that between 2021 and 2023 the total investment from Singapore had been around $162 million!
What happened to those projects worth $16 billion negotiated, thanks to the SLSFTA, in just the two-and-a-half months after the agreement came into effect and approved by the BOI? I do not know about the steel manufacturing plant for exports ($ 1 billion investment), flour milling plant ($ 50 million) and sugar refinery ($ 200 million).
However, story of the multibillion-dollar investment in the Petroleum Refinery unfolded in a manner that would qualify it as the best fairy tale with false promises presented by our politicians and the officials, prior to 2019 elections.
Though many Sri Lankans got to know, through the media which repeatedly highlighted a plethora of issues surrounding the project and the questionable credentials of the Singaporean investor, the construction work on the Mirrijiwela Oil Refinery along with the cement factory began on the24th of March 2019 with a bang and Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe and his ministers along with the foreign and local dignitaries laid the foundation stones.
That was few months before the 2019 Presidential elections. Inaugurating the construction work Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe said the projects will create thousands of job opportunities in the area and surrounding districts.
The oil refinery, which was to be built over 200 acres of land, with the capacity to refine 200,000 barrels of crude oil per day, was to generate US$7 billion of exports and create 1,500 direct and 3,000 indirect jobs. The construction of the refinery was to be completed in 44 months. Four years later, in August 2023 the Cabinet of Ministers approved the proposal presented by President Ranil Wickremesinghe to cancel the agreement with the investors of the refinery as the project has not been implemented! Can they explain to the country how much money was wasted to produce that fairy tale?
It is obvious that the President, ministers, and officials had made huge blunders and had deliberately misled the public and the parliament on the revenue loss and potential investment from SLSFTA with fairy tales and false promises.
As the president himself said, a country cannot be developed by making false promises or with fairy tales and these false promises and fairy tales had bankrupted the country. “Unfortunately, many segments of the population have not come to realize this yet”.
(The writer, a specialist and an activist on trade and development issues . )
US sports envoys to Lanka to champion youth development
Rahuman questions sudden cancellation of leave of CEB employees
